two and a half feet to that property line, and you can build anything you want up to that
two and a half feet. If we say, no, that has to be six feet, everything that's there is what
we call illegal nonconformity, which means it gets to stay, but if you ever do anything, it
has to come out.
MS. TADZHIBAYEV: Got you.
MS. GEUEA JONES: So you would have to tear down your carport if you wanted to
do an addition to the back of the building, for example.
MS. TADZHIBAYEV: That makes sense.
MS. GEUEA JONES: Yeah. But you don't have to tear anything down today, it just
makes it so that -- and not you, but a future property owner couldn't go, oh, I can build an
entire apartment complex there if I can go all the way to two and a half feet.
MS. TADZHIBAYEV: Okay. That makes sense.
MS. GEUEA JONES: If that makes sense. That's why when we say we're thinking
into the future and about other applicants. We are trying to help you, I promise.
MS. TADZHIBAYEV: Okay. If it means or helps in any way, I don't plan on selling or
removing this from my property at any point in my future. My son is planning on turning it
into a laboratory when I pass, if that makes sense, so --
MS. CARROLL: Laboratories take lots of square footage. I work at one myself.
MS. TADZHIBAYEV: But we definitely don't plan on selling it to another --
MR. MACMANN: He would need a conditional use permit for that property, so that's
what I --
MR. ZENNER: You'll be back before us again, just wait.
MS. LOE: We do those, too. Yeah.
MR. ZENNER: Before -- before our applicant leaves, what I -- because this is a
question that I think you all need to pose to them, and this is to address Ms. Geuea
Jones', I think, observation. While, yes, after conferring with Ms. Thompson, we probably
could move all of this forward, but we've discussed a lot of different things here this
evening. And probably to communicate properly with the design professional and the
applicant, it would be advantageous to table a vote on this this evening so we can get a
clean plan forward. Our next available agenda date is the 9th of June. What I suggest,
we had discussed this evening, given the framework of it's been all hashed out here, it
should not take but a week in which to prepare a revised plan. This could be returned to
the Commission on June 9th. Pursuant to our processing schedule, action on June 9th
would then go to our July 5th City Council meeting. It would be introduced, with a second
reading on July 18th. If you were given your notice in March, if correct, that is April, May,
June, July, August, September is six months. We would done with this at the beginning
of August at the latest, which would still then allow the applicant additional time. Now a
return trip back to us is out of the question. However, I believe with what we have